Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 180

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Dynamic m 6 A methylation facilitates mRNA triaging to stress granules

Anders, Maximilian, Chelysheva, Irina, Goebel, Ingrid, Trenkner, Timo, Zhou, Jun, Mao, Yuanhui, Verzini, Silvia, Qian, Shu-Bing, Ignatova, Zoya·2018·Life Science Alliance
DOI 10.26508/lsa.201800113PMC PMC6238392

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Reversible post-transcriptional modifications on messenger RNA emerge as prevalent phenomena in RNA metabolism. The most abundant among them is N 6 -methyladenosine (m 6 A) which is pivotal for RNA metabolism and function; its role in stress response remains elusive. We have discovered that in response to oxidative stress, transcripts are additionally m 6 A modified in their 5′ vicinity. Distinct from that of the translationally active mRNAs, this methylation pattern provides a selective mechanism for triaging mRNAs from the translatable pool to stress-induced stress granules. These stress-induced newly methylated sites are selectively recognized by the YTH domain family 3 (YTHDF3) “reader” protein, thereby revealing a new role for YTHDF3 in shaping the selectivity of stress response. Our findings describe a previously unappreciated function for RNA m 6 A modification in oxidative-stress response and expand the breadth of physiological roles of m 6 A.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.26508/lsa.201800113

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure S1. Exposure to stress and SGs formation. (A) SGs form in a concentration-depended manner in U2OS-G3BP1 and HEK-TIA1 cells following exposure to different concentrations of AS for 30 min (upper fluorescent images). TIA1 was visualized with FLAG antibodies (green), G3BP1 was visualized through its fluorescent GFP tag (green), and nuclei were counterstained with DAPI (blue). Control denotes untreated cells. Scale bar, 10 μm. Polysome profiles of HEK-TIA1 cells exposed to different AS concentrations (lower panel). 80S designates an assembled ribosome and 40S and 60S denote the ribosomal subunits. (B) mRNAs are sequestered in SGs. In situ hybridization (FISH) with combined probe for ADAMTS1, ADAMTS3, ADAMTS8, and ADAMTS15 transcripts (all also detected as m6A modified in the m6A-Seq) in U2OS-G3BP1 exposed for 30 min to AS. Scale bar, 10 μm. (C) Comparison between total mRNA from control HEK-TIA1 cells or exposed to 500 μM AS determined from RNA-Seq. Genes with significantly increased expression under stress are designated. R2 = 0.978, Pearson correlation coefficient. Source data are available for this figure.
Figure S1. Exposure to stress and SGs formation. (A) SGs form in a concentration-depended manner in U2OS-G3BP1 and HEK-TIA1 cells following exposure to different concentrations of AS for 30 min (upper fluorescent images). TIA1 was visualized with FLAG antibodies (green), G3BP1 was visualized through its fluorescent GFP tag (green), and nuclei were counterstained with DAPI (blue). Control denotes untreated cells. Scale bar, 10 μm. Polysome profiles of HEK-TIA1 cells exposed to different AS concentrations (lower panel). 80S designates an assembled ribosome and 40S and 60S denote the ribosomal subunits. (B) mRNAs are sequestered in SGs. In situ hybridization (FISH) with combined probe for ADAMTS1, ADAMTS3, ADAMTS8, and ADAMTS15 transcripts (all also detected as m6A modified in the m6A-Seq) in U2OS-G3BP1 exposed for 30 min to AS. Scale bar, 10 μm. (C) Comparison between total mRNA from control HEK-TIA1 cells or exposed to 500 μM AS determined from RNA-Seq. Genes with significantly increased expression under stress are designated. R2 = 0.978, Pearson correlation coefficient. Source data are available for this figure.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 1. m6A signal increases in response to oxidative stress and accumulates in SGs. (A) U2OS-G3BP1 cells grown under permissive conditions (control), exposed to mild (200 μM AS) or harsh (500 μM AS) oxidative stress for 30 min, or to heat for 2 h at 42°C and immunostained with anti-m6A antibody. SGs (hyperfluorescent loci) were visualized through G3BP1–GFP (green), nuclei were counterstained with DAPI (blue). Scale bar, 10 μm. (B) Combined siRNA knockdown of the “writer” complex (METTL3, METTL14, and WTAP) or METTL3 alone (lowest row) in U2OS-G3BP1 cells. METTL3, METTL14, or WTAP were silenced to maximally 70%, resulting in some residual m6A immunostaining (Fig S2A). Scale bar, 10 μM. (C) Comparison of the expression of total mRNA in control growth and following siRNA-mediated knockdown of the “writer” complex (-writers) in HEK-TIA1 cells determined by RNA-Seq. R2 = 0.928, Pearson correlation coefficient. (D) Total RNA isolated from the same amount of U2OS-G3BP1 cells grown at permissive (control) conditions or exposed to various AS concentrations and detected with m6A antibody or methylene blue. (E) Box-plot of m6A sites (from the m6A-Seq) detected across all mRNAs of untreated cells (control) or exposed to stress (500 μM AS) and presented as a ratio of the total m6A sites (e.g., predicted DRACH motifs designated as A in the ratio m6A/A). P = 2.8 × 10−6 control versus stress, Mann–Whitney test. Source data are available for this figure.
Figure 1. m6A signal increases in response to oxidative stress and accumulates in SGs. (A) U2OS-G3BP1 cells grown under permissive conditions (control), exposed to mild (200 μM AS) or harsh (500 μM AS) oxidative stress for 30 min, or to heat for 2 h at 42°C and immunostained with anti-m6A antibody. SGs (hyperfluorescent loci) were visualized through G3BP1–GFP (green), nuclei were counterstained with DAPI (blue). Scale bar, 10 μm. (B) Combined siRNA knockdown of the “writer” complex (METTL3, METTL14, and WTAP) or METTL3 alone (lowest row) in U2OS-G3BP1 cells. METTL3, METTL14, or WTAP were silenced to maximally 70%, resulting in some residual m6A immunostaining (Fig S2A). Scale bar, 10 μM. (C) Comparison of the expression of total mRNA in control growth and following siRNA-mediated knockdown of the “writer” complex (-writers) in HEK-TIA1 cells determined by RNA-Seq. R2 = 0.928, Pearson correlation coefficient. (D) Total RNA isolated from the same amount of U2OS-G3BP1 cells grown at permissive (control) conditions or exposed to various AS concentrations and detected with m6A antibody or methylene blue. (E) Box-plot of m6A sites (from the m6A-Seq) detected across all mRNAs of untreated cells (control) or exposed to stress (500 μM AS) and presented as a ratio of the total m6A sites (e.g., predicted DRACH motifs designated as A in the ratio m6A/A). P = 2.8 × 10−6 control versus stress, Mann–Whitney test. Source data are available for this figure.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure S2. Cellular localization of the “writers” and “erasers” in U2OS-G3BP1 cells. (A) qRT–PCR following combined siRNA knockdown of the “writer complex” (METTL3, METTL14, and WTAP) for 48 h. The levels of each writer mRNA were normalized to the expression of β-actin mRNA. Data are means ± SD (n = 2). Scr denotes scrambled siRNA and accounts for unspecific effects. Representative Western blots (n = 2) to verify the decrease in the expression of each of the proteins in the writer complex using specific antibodies. GAPDH serves as loading control. (B) Localization of METTL3, METTL14, and WTAP under permissive growth and upon stress exposure (500 μM AS, 30 min). G3BP1 detected through its fluorescent GFP tag is used to monitor SG formation under stress. Scale bar, 10 μm. (C) Nuclear localization of FTO (upper panel) and ALKH5 (bottom panel) “erasers” in both control growth and following treatment with 500 μM AS for 30 min. G3BP1 detected through its fluorescent GFP tag is used to monitor SG formation under stress. Scale bar, 10 μm. (D) Total RNA isolated from equal amount of HEK-TIA1 cells grown at permissive (control) conditions or exposed to various AS concentrations and detected with m6A antibody or methylene blue (MB). Source data are available for this figure.
Figure S2. Cellular localization of the “writers” and “erasers” in U2OS-G3BP1 cells. (A) qRT–PCR following combined siRNA knockdown of the “writer complex” (METTL3, METTL14, and WTAP) for 48 h. The levels of each writer mRNA were normalized to the expression of β-actin mRNA. Data are means ± SD (n = 2). Scr denotes scrambled siRNA and accounts for unspecific effects. Representative Western blots (n = 2) to verify the decrease in the expression of each of the proteins in the writer complex using specific antibodies. GAPDH serves as loading control. (B) Localization of METTL3, METTL14, and WTAP under permissive growth and upon stress exposure (500 μM AS, 30 min). G3BP1 detected through its fluorescent GFP tag is used to monitor SG formation under stress. Scale bar, 10 μm. (C) Nuclear localization of FTO (upper panel) and ALKH5 (bottom panel) “erasers” in both control growth and following treatment with 500 μM AS for 30 min. G3BP1 detected through its fluorescent GFP tag is used to monitor SG formation under stress. Scale bar, 10 μm. (D) Total RNA isolated from equal amount of HEK-TIA1 cells grown at permissive (control) conditions or exposed to various AS concentrations and detected with m6A antibody or methylene blue (MB). Source data are available for this figure.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure S3. Analysis of the deep-sequencing data. (A) Venn diagram of mRNAs containing at least one m6A modification (upper diagram) and m6A peaks detected in mRNAs (lower diagram) identified in HEK-TIA1 (HEK) cells under control growth and at 500 μM AS stress. (B) Venn diagram of mRNAs containing at least one m6A modification (upper diagram) and m6A peaks detected in mRNAs (lower diagram) identified in HEK-TIA1 (HEK) cells in this study compared with those in U2OS cells (Xiang et al, 2017). (C) Transmission electron microscopy image of isolated SGs (gray arrow) subjected to PAR-CLIP (upper images). Black arrow indicates magnetic beads (appear as light, non-transparent black dots) used to isolate SGs. FISH on isolated SGs using fluorescently labeled oligo-dT primers recognizing the polyA tails of mRNAs (red). The yellow/orange color denotes colocalization of polyA-mRNA and G3BP1-GFP (green) signal. Scale bar, 0.5 μM. (D) The two most abundant motifs among the SG mRNA clients revealed by MEME motif search. These motifs score for various RNA-binding proteins and not only for TIA1 (Munteanu et al, 2018 Preprint). (E). Comparison between total mRNA from control HEK-TIA1 cells or exposed to 200 μM AS determined by RNA-Seq. R2 = 0.992, Pearson correlation coefficient. (F) Identified SG clients span a large expression range. Total mRNAs, black; mRNAs in SGs, blue; and mRNAs generating RPFs at 200 μM AS, red. (G) Distribution of the predicted DRACH motifs (upper plot) or depicted as fractions (lower pie charts) in different transcript segments of the SG clients and translated genes. Transcript regions were binned for comparable lengths. CDS are the longest and exhibit the highest fraction of m6A motifs. Genes translated under moderate stress exposure (200 μM AS) contain more DRACH motifs in the 5′ UTRs compared with the 5′ UTRs of the SG mRNA clients, P = 1.4 × 10−3, Mann–Whitney test. (H) Correlation of the SG transcripts detected at 200 and 500 μM AS in the PAR-CLIP of two merged biological replicates. R2 = 0.883, Pearson correlation coefficient. Source data are available for this figure.
Figure S3. Analysis of the deep-sequencing data. (A) Venn diagram of mRNAs containing at least one m6A modification (upper diagram) and m6A peaks detected in mRNAs (lower diagram) identified in HEK-TIA1 (HEK) cells under control growth and at 500 μM AS stress. (B) Venn diagram of mRNAs containing at least one m6A modification (upper diagram) and m6A peaks detected in mRNAs (lower diagram) identified in HEK-TIA1 (HEK) cells in this study compared with those in U2OS cells (Xiang et al, 2017). (C) Transmission electron microscopy image of isolated SGs (gray arrow) subjected to PAR-CLIP (upper images). Black arrow indicates magnetic beads (appear as light, non-transparent black dots) used to isolate SGs. FISH on isolated SGs using fluorescently labeled oligo-dT primers recognizing the polyA tails of mRNAs (red). The yellow/orange color denotes colocalization of polyA-mRNA and G3BP1-GFP (green) signal. Scale bar, 0.5 μM. (D) The two most abundant motifs among the SG mRNA clients revealed by MEME motif search. These motifs score for various RNA-binding proteins and not only for TIA1 (Munteanu et al, 2018 Preprint). (E). Comparison between total mRNA from control HEK-TIA1 cells or exposed to 200 μM AS determined by RNA-Seq. R2 = 0.992, Pearson correlation coefficient. (F) Identified SG clients span a large expression range. Total mRNAs, black; mRNAs in SGs, blue; and mRNAs generating RPFs at 200 μM AS, red. (G) Distribution of the predicted DRACH motifs (upper plot) or depicted as fractions (lower pie charts) in different transcript segments of the SG clients and translated genes. Transcript regions were binned for comparable lengths. CDS are the longest and exhibit the highest fraction of m6A motifs. Genes translated under moderate stress exposure (200 μM AS) contain more DRACH motifs in the 5′ UTRs compared with the 5′ UTRs of the SG mRNA clients, P = 1.4 × 10−3, Mann–Whitney test. (H) Correlation of the SG transcripts detected at 200 and 500 μM AS in the PAR-CLIP of two merged biological replicates. R2 = 0.883, Pearson correlation coefficient. Source data are available for this figure.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2. Site-specific methylation of SG mRNAs in response to oxidative stress. (A) Overview of the experimental setup. Numbers denote confidently identified mRNAs in each deep-sequencing approach. (B) Overlap of the SG transcripts from the PAR-CLIP and m6A-Seq data sets. (C) Box-plot of m6A sites (from the m6A-Seq) detected across SG transcripts of untreated HEK-TIA1 cells (control) or exposed to stress (500 μM AS) and presented as a ratio of the total m6A sites (e.g., predicted DRACH motifs designated as A in the ratio m6A/A). P = 5.1 × 10−4 control versus stress, Mann–Whitney test. (D) Average number of m6A-modified DRACH motifs detected in the SG mRNAs following stress exposure to 500 μM AS (stress) compared with their methylation level under control growth. P = 1.49 × 10−5 control versus stress, Mann–Whitney test. For comparison, the average number of all putative DRACH motifs (predicted) per transcript is also included. (E) Metagene profiles of m6A distribution (from the m6A-Seq) along different transcript regions of SG mRNAs from untreated (control) or cells exposed to 500 μM AS (stress). P = 1.4 × 10−3 for 5′ UTRs and P = 1.6 × 10−2 for 5′ vicinity of the CDSs; Mann–Whitney test between stress versus control. Transcript regions were binned for comparable lengths. (F) An example of stress-induced m6A modification in the SG transcript TRIM65. (G) Deletion of the methylation sites in the 5′ vicinity of ARL4C mRNA hinders its localization into SGs. U2OS-G3BP1 cells expressing ARL4C-CFP with unchanged sequence (control) or deleted DRACH motifs (-DRACH) exposed to 500 μM AS. The colocalization of the wild-type ARL4C-CFP mRNA with SGs is designated by white arrows. ARL4C-CFP mRNA was visualized by in situ hybridization (FISH). SGs (hyperfluorescent loci) were visualized through G3BP1–GFP (green), and nuclei were counterstained with DAPI (blue). 58 of 70 cells (83%) showed loss of colocalization by deleted DRACH motifs. Scale bar, 10 μm. Source data are available for this figure.
Figure 2. Site-specific methylation of SG mRNAs in response to oxidative stress. (A) Overview of the experimental setup. Numbers denote confidently identified mRNAs in each deep-sequencing approach. (B) Overlap of the SG transcripts from the PAR-CLIP and m6A-Seq data sets. (C) Box-plot of m6A sites (from the m6A-Seq) detected across SG transcripts of untreated HEK-TIA1 cells (control) or exposed to stress (500 μM AS) and presented as a ratio of the total m6A sites (e.g., predicted DRACH motifs designated as A in the ratio m6A/A). P = 5.1 × 10−4 control versus stress, Mann–Whitney test. (D) Average number of m6A-modified DRACH motifs detected in the SG mRNAs following stress exposure to 500 μM AS (stress) compared with their methylation level under control growth. P = 1.49 × 10−5 control versus stress, Mann–Whitney test. For comparison, the average number of all putative DRACH motifs (predicted) per transcript is also included. (E) Metagene profiles of m6A distribution (from the m6A-Seq) along different transcript regions of SG mRNAs from untreated (control) or cells exposed to 500 μM AS (stress). P = 1.4 × 10−3 for 5′ UTRs and P = 1.6 × 10−2 for 5′ vicinity of the CDSs; Mann–Whitney test between stress versus control. Transcript regions were binned for comparable lengths. (F) An example of stress-induced m6A modification in the SG transcript TRIM65. (G) Deletion of the methylation sites in the 5′ vicinity of ARL4C mRNA hinders its localization into SGs. U2OS-G3BP1 cells expressing ARL4C-CFP with unchanged sequence (control) or deleted DRACH motifs (-DRACH) exposed to 500 μM AS. The colocalization of the wild-type ARL4C-CFP mRNA with SGs is designated by white arrows. ARL4C-CFP mRNA was visualized by in situ hybridization (FISH). SGs (hyperfluorescent loci) were visualized through G3BP1–GFP (green), and nuclei were counterstained with DAPI (blue). 58 of 70 cells (83%) showed loss of colocalization by deleted DRACH motifs. Scale bar, 10 μm. Source data are available for this figure.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3. Oxidative stress globally impairs translation. (A) Overview of the experimental setup at mild stress (200 μM AS). Numbers denote confidently identified transcripts in each deep-sequencing approach. (B) Log-changes of the RD values between control and exposed to 200 μM AS HEK-TIA1 cells. Inset, RD values of the mitochondrially encoded genes which remain unchanged and are used as baseline for normalization of RD values of the nuclearly encoded genes. (C) Cumulative metagene profile of the read density as a function of position for both RPF (from Ribo-Seq) and mRNAs (from RNA-Seq) upon exposure to 200 μM AS. The expressed genes were individually normalized, aligned at the start codon, and averaged with equal weight. (D) Representative examples of a genuinely translated transcript (TUBB4B) and a transcript with stalled translation (PSMB1) at 200 μM AS. The first nucleotide of the start codon is designated as zero. (E) Venn diagram of the distribution of various transcript groups detected at 200 μM AS. SG, detected in the PAR-CLIP, degraded, identified in the RNA-Seq, red circles, mRNAs with RPFs in the Ribo-Seq. (F) Box-plot of m6A sites (from the m6A-Seq) detected across the actively translated 108 transcripts in control growth or upon stress exposure and presented as a ratio of the total m6A sites (e.g., predicted DRACH motifs designated as A in the ratio m6A/A). P = 0.97 control versus stress, Mann–Whitney test. Source data are available for this figure.
Figure 3. Oxidative stress globally impairs translation. (A) Overview of the experimental setup at mild stress (200 μM AS). Numbers denote confidently identified transcripts in each deep-sequencing approach. (B) Log-changes of the RD values between control and exposed to 200 μM AS HEK-TIA1 cells. Inset, RD values of the mitochondrially encoded genes which remain unchanged and are used as baseline for normalization of RD values of the nuclearly encoded genes. (C) Cumulative metagene profile of the read density as a function of position for both RPF (from Ribo-Seq) and mRNAs (from RNA-Seq) upon exposure to 200 μM AS. The expressed genes were individually normalized, aligned at the start codon, and averaged with equal weight. (D) Representative examples of a genuinely translated transcript (TUBB4B) and a transcript with stalled translation (PSMB1) at 200 μM AS. The first nucleotide of the start codon is designated as zero. (E) Venn diagram of the distribution of various transcript groups detected at 200 μM AS. SG, detected in the PAR-CLIP, degraded, identified in the RNA-Seq, red circles, mRNAs with RPFs in the Ribo-Seq. (F) Box-plot of m6A sites (from the m6A-Seq) detected across the actively translated 108 transcripts in control growth or upon stress exposure and presented as a ratio of the total m6A sites (e.g., predicted DRACH motifs designated as A in the ratio m6A/A). P = 0.97 control versus stress, Mann–Whitney test. Source data are available for this figure.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4. YDHDF3 colocalizes with m6A-modified mRNA into SGs. (A) Cellular localization of YTHDF1, YTHDF2, and YTHDF3 in U2OS-G3BP1 cells exposed to oxidative stress (500 μM AS) alone or combined with knockdown (-writers) of the writer complex (METTL3, METTL14, and WTAP). Scale bar, 10 μM. (B) siRNA knockdown of YTHDF3 in U2OS-G3BP1 cells abrogated colocalization of m6A-modified RNA within the SGs. (C) Total RNA of SGs isolated from U2OS-G3BP1 with siRNA knockdown of the writer complex (-writers) or YTHDF3 (-YTHDF3), and control cells exposed to 500 μM AS and detected with m6A antibody or fluorescently labeled oligo-dT primers recognizing the polyA tails of mRNAs. (D) Common clients between the YTHDF3 PAR-CLIP target genes (4,227) and total SG clients (6,020 transcripts) and the methylated SG clients detected with high confidence in m6A-Seq (3,294 transcripts). P = 1.07 × 10−155 (for PAR-CLIP, left) and P = 3.78 × 10−214 (for m6A-Seq, right), hypergeometric test.
Figure 4. YDHDF3 colocalizes with m6A-modified mRNA into SGs. (A) Cellular localization of YTHDF1, YTHDF2, and YTHDF3 in U2OS-G3BP1 cells exposed to oxidative stress (500 μM AS) alone or combined with knockdown (-writers) of the writer complex (METTL3, METTL14, and WTAP). Scale bar, 10 μM. (B) siRNA knockdown of YTHDF3 in U2OS-G3BP1 cells abrogated colocalization of m6A-modified RNA within the SGs. (C) Total RNA of SGs isolated from U2OS-G3BP1 with siRNA knockdown of the writer complex (-writers) or YTHDF3 (-YTHDF3), and control cells exposed to 500 μM AS and detected with m6A antibody or fluorescently labeled oligo-dT primers recognizing the polyA tails of mRNAs. (D) Common clients between the YTHDF3 PAR-CLIP target genes (4,227) and total SG clients (6,020 transcripts) and the methylated SG clients detected with high confidence in m6A-Seq (3,294 transcripts). P = 1.07 × 10−155 (for PAR-CLIP, left) and P = 3.78 × 10−214 (for m6A-Seq, right), hypergeometric test.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure S4. Localization and clients of the YTHDF readers. (A) Cytoplasmic localization of YTHDF1, YTHDF2, and YTHDF3 in control, unstressed cells and by silenced “writers” (METTL3, METTL14, and WTAP). The “readers” were detected with Alexa568-conjugated secondary antibody (red). Scale bar, 10 μm. (B) qRT–PCR following siRNA knockdown of YTHDF3 for 48 h in U2OS-G3BP1 cells. The YTHDF3 expression was normalized to the expression of β-actin mRNA. Scr denotes scrambled siRNA and accounts for unspecific effects. (C) mRNA clients of YTHDF1 identified by PAR-CLIP in Wang et al (2015) and compared with the SG transcripts identified in this study. P = 0.006, hypergeometric test. (D) mRNA clients of YTHDF2 identified by PAR-CLIP in Wang et al (2014) and compared with the SG transcripts identified in this study. P = 3.9 × 10−4, hypergeometric test. Source data are available for this figure.
Figure S4. Localization and clients of the YTHDF readers. (A) Cytoplasmic localization of YTHDF1, YTHDF2, and YTHDF3 in control, unstressed cells and by silenced “writers” (METTL3, METTL14, and WTAP). The “readers” were detected with Alexa568-conjugated secondary antibody (red). Scale bar, 10 μm. (B) qRT–PCR following siRNA knockdown of YTHDF3 for 48 h in U2OS-G3BP1 cells. The YTHDF3 expression was normalized to the expression of β-actin mRNA. Scr denotes scrambled siRNA and accounts for unspecific effects. (C) mRNA clients of YTHDF1 identified by PAR-CLIP in Wang et al (2015) and compared with the SG transcripts identified in this study. P = 0.006, hypergeometric test. (D) mRNA clients of YTHDF2 identified by PAR-CLIP in Wang et al (2014) and compared with the SG transcripts identified in this study. P = 3.9 × 10−4, hypergeometric test. Source data are available for this figure.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5. Proposed model of mRNA triaging into SGs. mRNAs associate with SGs either by stress-induced methylation in an YTHDF3-dependent manner (left) or by stress-induced stalling at initiation (right).
Figure 5. Proposed model of mRNA triaging into SGs. mRNAs associate with SGs either by stress-induced methylation in an YTHDF3-dependent manner (left) or by stress-induced stalling at initiation (right).CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Research works printed but not linked: 42

  1. 10.1038/nature14281 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.7554/eLife.03971 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/j.molcel.2009.11.020 · DOI
  4. 10.1186/1471-2164-8-273 · DOI
  5. 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.10.002 · DOI
  6. 10.1101/gad.17355911 · DOI
  7. 10.1101/cshperspect.a012286 · DOI
  8. 10.1038/nature11112 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1038/nsmb.3462 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1091/mbc.E04-08-0715 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.cell.2010.03.009 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1038/nature17978 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/j.cell.2015.12.038 · DOI
  14. 10.1016/j.tibs.2013.07.004 · DOI
  15. 10.1083/jcb.201508028 · DOI
  16. 10.1083/jcb.200502088 · DOI
  17. 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.10.015 · DOI
  18. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3680-05.2006 · DOI
  19. 10.1371/journal.pbio.2000779 · DOI
  20. 10.1038/cr.2017.10 · DOI
  21. 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.03.021 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 10.1016/j.molcel.2015.08.018 · DOI
  23. 10.1016/j.molcel.2012.12.001 · DOI
  24. 10.1038/nature14234 · DOI · Paper page
  25. 10.1038/nature21022 · DOI
  26. 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100616-060758 · DOI
  27. 10.1016/j.cell.2015.10.012 · DOI
  28. 10.1016/j.cell.2015.09.015 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Munteanu A , Mukherjee N , Ohler U (2018) SSMART: Sequence-structure motif identification for RNA-binding proteins. Bioinformatics. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty404. · DOI
  30. 10.1038/ncb1783 · DOI
  31. 10.1016/j.tibs.2012.12.006 · DOI
  32. 10.1083/jcb.201609081 · DOI
  33. 10.1016/j.tcb.2016.05.004 · DOI
  34. 10.1016/j.cell.2017.05.045 · DOI · Paper page
  35. 10.1016/j.cell.2009.01.042 · DOI · Paper page
  36. 10.1016/B978-0-12-420120-0.00008-6 · DOI
  37. 10.1083/jcb.201404124 · DOI
  38. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp120 · DOI
  39. 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.05.041 · DOI
  40. 10.1016/j.cell.2015.05.014 · DOI · Paper page
  41. 10.1038/nature21671 · DOI
  42. 10.1038/nature15377 · DOI

Cited by

See all 180

Metadata

Authors
Anders, M., Chelysheva, I., Goebel, I., Trenkner, T., Zhou, J., Mao, Y., Verzini, S., Qian, S.-B., & Ignatova, Z.
ORCID
Ignatova, Zoya
Venue
Life Science Alliance
Publisher
Life Science Alliance, LLC
Published
2018-07-03
Volume
1
Issue
4
Pages
e201800113
ISSN
2575-1077
DOI
10.26508/lsa.201800113
PMC
PMC6238392
Cited by
180
References
8
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (IG73/14-1, IG73/14-2)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Dynamic m 6 A methylation facilitates mRNA triaging to stress granules. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.26508/lsa.201800113
The paper
Anders, M., Chelysheva, I., Goebel, I., Trenkner, T., Zhou, J., Mao, Y., Verzini, S., Qian, S.-B., & Ignatova, Z. (2018). Dynamic m 6 A methylation facilitates mRNA triaging to stress granules. Life Science Alliance. https://doi.org/10.26508/lsa.201800113

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.